Previous in Forum: Electro-Magnetic Gripper Design Problems   Next in Forum: Part Per Million Conversion
Close
Close
Close
14 comments
Rate Comments: Nested
Active Contributor

Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 23

Flanges Rating

06/13/2007 9:13 AM

Dear All,

I Hussain Mechanical Engineer,

This is Regarind C.S.Flanges

In C.S.Flanges What does Class#150 or #300 stand for if anyone advice me in details

Register to Reply
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.
Associate
South Africa - Member - ShoSholoza Engineering Fields - Mechanical Engineering - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member

Join Date: May 2007
Location: South Africa
Posts: 44
#1

Re: Flanges Rating

06/13/2007 10:18 AM

Very Briefly:

The flange rating 150#, 300#, 600# ...indicates the suitability of the flange to work at higher pressure & temperatures i.e. as the design temperatures & pressures increase, you would change from a 150# to 300# to 600# flange. Generally, if you look at ASME B16-5, you would see that 300# flanges are thicker and probably have more bolts / thicker bolts that 150#

__________________
Can you imitate yourself?
Register to Reply
Anonymous Poster
#2

Re: Flanges Rating

06/14/2007 2:22 AM

Dear Hussain,

#150,#300,#600 stands for the maximum working pressure rating of 150 psi, 300psi and 600psi respectively. normally the details of this you can find in ASME B16.5 FLANGE STANDARD.

NASIM KHAN

Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Stoke-on-Trent, UK
Posts: 4496
Good Answers: 137
#3
In reply to #2

Re: Flanges Rating

06/14/2007 4:19 AM

Agreed, but it's worth adding that the nominal rating, 150psi, 300psi etc are at elevated temperature ~ 500 - 800°F - varies with the rating, but figures are in the tables. (don't know why these particular temperatures are used, it seems rather arbitrary). So if you're working at lower temperature the pressure can be 2 - 3 x higher than nominal rating, again figures are in the tables.

The metric system, PN6, PN10, PN16 etc works the other way round. 6bar, 10bar, 16bar etc are at ambient temperature, and must be derated at elevated temperature.

Codey

__________________
Give masochists a fair crack of the whip
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Piping Design Engineering - New Member Egypt - Member - Member since 02/18/2007

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Posts: 1733
Good Answers: 248
#6
In reply to #2

Re: Flanges Rating

06/14/2007 6:44 PM

#150,#300,#600, .... etc. is just a rating or class nomination for standard flanges, and doesn't denotes to any max. or min. working pressure or temp. neither respectively nor irrespectively. I mean no relation between rating #150 and pressure 150 psi. From its name, the Pressure Temp. Rating depends on Design Pressure and Design Temp. of a Specified Material. See ASME B16.5, Table 2 for different groups of materials.

__________________
It is better to be defeated on principles, than to win on lies!
Register to Reply
Anonymous Poster
#10
In reply to #6

Re: Flanges Rating

02/05/2009 5:41 PM

Thanks for your answer. it is exactly what I was thinking. My boss keeps giving me the idea that # and psi are equal, i.e. 200psi = 200#. I don't buy it.

Register to Reply
Anonymous Poster
#14
In reply to #6

Re: Flanges Rating

10/26/2010 4:19 AM

It has a relation to the non-shock pressure , # 150 means it will withstand pressure of 150 psig @ 500 degree F , and for # 300, 600 , 900 , 1500 , 2500 it means that the flanges will withstand the pressure of this rating value at temperature of 850 degree F.

Register to Reply
Participant

Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2
#12
In reply to #2

Re: Flanges Rating

07/28/2009 12:56 PM

Dear All,

How about JIS 10K? according to flange pressure rating ASME 16.5 ie: material ss 304, the flanges rating can withstand up to 18bar which is higher than JIS 16K

What is the different between JIS 10K and 16K exspecially in pressure rating (phsyical dimension might be different)

Please advice

Register to Reply
Power-User
United States - Member - New Member Engineering Fields - Chemical Engineering - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 367
Good Answers: 10
#4

Re: Flanges Rating

06/14/2007 8:49 AM

Here is a link that should be pretty close to the temperature/pressure ratings for each flange class. Hope it helps.

http://www.piping-toolbox.com/ansi-flanges-pressure-temperature-d_342.html

__________________
Money doesn't talk, it screams in your face.
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: KnoxTN
Posts: 1485
Good Answers: 6
#5

Re: Flanges Rating

06/14/2007 4:29 PM

"In C.S.Flanges What does Class#150 or #300 stand for if anyone advice me in details"

IIRC 150 and 300 psi, respectively.

CS Flange Ratings

Temperature and pressure service ratings.

__________________
Do Nothing Simply When a Way Can be Found to Make it Complex and Wonderful
Register to Reply
Active Contributor

Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 18
Good Answers: 1
#7

Re: Flanges Rating

06/15/2007 12:23 PM

This is a "pet peeve " of mine. To elliminate the confusion you may have, as ASME B 16.5 correctly refers to ratings of flanges (pressure/temperature) as CLASS, not pound. That is to say that the terminology of 150 # is archaic and should be stated correctly as Class 150, etc. As you will see in the standard, almost all used metallurgy have material components along with their reference tables for allowable working pressures at required process temperature. Use of a certain material is up to the engineer responsible for understanding corrosion, hardness, etc. needs for material appropriate for the fluid (liquid/gas/vapor).

I hope that this doesn't perturb those with old habits, but right is right.

Pete (Control Systems)

Register to Reply
Active Contributor

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Chicago Heights, Il.
Posts: 17
#8
In reply to #7

Re: Flanges Rating

01/25/2008 1:49 PM

A guy in my office wants to know who and or how they came up calling it 150# and not class 150 etc..

__________________
Sh** doesn't just happen, we engineers make it happen!
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Piping Design Engineering - New Member Egypt - Member - Member since 02/18/2007

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Cairo, Egypt
Posts: 1733
Good Answers: 248
#9
In reply to #8

Re: Flanges Rating

01/26/2008 1:06 AM

The classes 150#, 300#, ... etc. are "just" considered as a categorization or family name for each group of flanges. The calling up is first created by ANSI under ANSI B16.5 and ANSI B16.47, and starting from 1998 the publications issued under ASME B16.5 and ASME B16.47.

Note. 150# Class 150 ≡ Rating 150, all three names are correct.

__________________
It is better to be defeated on principles, than to win on lies!
Register to Reply
Participant

Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 2
#11
In reply to #9

Re: Flanges Rating

07/28/2009 12:50 PM

Hi,

I have few issue need your advice:

my system design was 14 bar at temperature 90 deg.C and i'm using flange JIS 10K. According to calculation of flange pressure rating ASME 16.5 i got maximun design pressure approx 18 bar and material i'm using is SS 304.

I need your opinion can i withstand with flange JIS 10K instead of JIS 16K. How about flange gasket? still it take into consideration on determine pressure rating? or any other parameter have to taking care in calculation of design rating?

from the max. design pressure, how much safety margin we should apply? can we hydrotest with max. design pressure x 1.5 ?

Please advice

Register to Reply
Anonymous Poster
#13

Re: Flanges Rating

08/11/2009 10:35 AM

The actual class rating system is based on the first actual use of the ASME code which is for steam piping and boiler design. The ratings refer to the once actual ratings of the flanges derated for steam ( I can't remember if it was for saturated or a certain degree of superheat). i.e. 150 # flanges are rated for 150# steam. However, over the years as metallurgy has improved and derations have lessened for some materials, this is not entirely accurate.

Register to Reply
Register to Reply 14 comments
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

Abdel Halim Galala (2); Anonymous Poster (4); betomachine (1); Codemaster (1); fzmizal (2); mcarlson (1); Pete (Contol Systems) (1); Stirling Stan (1); The Hammer (1)

Previous in Forum: Electro-Magnetic Gripper Design Problems   Next in Forum: Part Per Million Conversion

Advertisement